I have seen no explanation of why the Journal is down, rather than up. The Times is up, rather than down, because it is pursuing circulation outside the NY metropolitan area. For instance, the Times is available here, in the Blue Ridge Mountains. They CANNOT be making money on that effort. They have to be doing that to be able to tell their advertisers that their circulation has at least held constant.
Congressman Billybob
Latest column, " 'L.A. Chappaquiddick,' Starring Hillary Clinton."
However, both of their changes was so small it was insignificant.
Yes, I live in Maine and I have gotten calls pressuring me to take a NYT subscription. They are scrambling to keep ahead of the lost readership, I think.
I've read that the WSJ is one of the few, or perhaps the only, large paper making money on it's Internet edition.
Are Internet subscribers counted along with ink and paper subscribers?
The St. Petersberg Times is the main paper where I live, next to the Tampa Tribune. It is as biased as the NY Times, maybe even more.
I swear, whenever I see it, I think the criteria for getting on the front page is whether or not it makes Bush and conservatives look bad.
If they can't spin it, they at least change the headline to something negative about Bush.
If they can't find anything negative, they put an editorial on the front page on how bad Bush is.
It makes me mad almost everyday. I am SO HAPPY to see their circulation dropping.